-- -Original Message-
-- From: tom [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
-- Sent: Monday, February 24, 2003 5:51 PM
--
-- -Original Message-
-- From: Pål Jensen [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
--
-- Mark wrote:
--
-- Actually, I'm considering doing just that myself. I'm
-- thinking of
On Mon, 24 Feb 2003, J. C. O'Connell wrote:
do you still get the auto aperture function
when you mount a 67 lens on a 645 body
via the adapter?
From 67-645, yes. From 645-K, no..stop down only.
(of course, for those of us who are obsessed with wide open, that's not so
bad at all)
--
On Mon, 24 Feb 2003, tom wrote:
Wierd, I think this is the greatest short tele of all time.
The FA150/2.8 or the A150/3.5?
I remember hearing less-than-stellar talk about one of them, I thought
they were in fact referring to the FA version, not the older A.
--
http://www.infotainment.org
I used to have a p6x7, but sold it last year.
The answer really depends on what you plan it to use for. Do you need AF and
automation? Is weight a factor? How big a tripod do you want to carry? Metal or
plastic? Price? Do you need zooms? Do you care for a lot of primes? Do you prefer
square or
On Tue, 25 Feb 2003, tom wrote:
Trust me, the FA is great.
I won't doubt you, I just received the A150 about two weeks ago, I haven't
really done much with it.
--
http://www.infotainment.org - more fun than a poke in your eye.
http://www.eighteenpercent.com- photography and
Thanks for all your responses. I will go out to a
camera store and rent both systems to see which one is
preferrable for me. Some more additional questions if
you don't mind. With regards to the Pentax 645 and
67, which bodies are autofocus? Will non-AF lenses
work with AF bodies and
Does Pentax still service the original 6x7?
The non MLU version, no. The MLU version, yes.
William Robb
-Original Message-
From: Francis Alviar [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Hello to all,
I am considering investing in a medium format system.
I'd like to ask owners of the Pentax 645 and Pentax 67
cameras their opinion on which system to invest in and
why. Besides the difference in film
-Original Message-
From: tom [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
-Original Message-
From: Francis Alviar [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Hello to all,
I am considering investing in a medium format system.
I'd like to ask owners of the Pentax 645 and Pentax 67
cameras their
On Mon, 24 Feb 2003, Francis Alviar wrote:
I am considering investing in a medium format system.
I'd like to ask owners of the Pentax 645 and Pentax 67
cameras their opinion on which system to invest in and
why. Besides the difference in film size, what are
the advantages and disadvantages
tom [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
- lenses (the 67 probably has more
No way. Because with the 67-645 adapter the 645 can use all the 67
lenses PLUS all the lenses made for the 645.
--
Mark Roberts
Photography and writing
www.robertstech.com
Francis wrote:
I am considering investing in a medium format system.
I'd like to ask owners of the Pentax 645 and Pentax 67
cameras their opinion on which system to invest in and
why. Besides the difference in film size, what are
the advantages and disadvantages of a 645 camera
compared
On Mon, 24 Feb 2003, tom wrote:
Pro 67
- big neg
- built like a big old manual focus camera of yore
- interchangeable finders
Mirror lock up.
Pro 645
- af
Only on the newer models.
- more shots per roll
- lighter as a system
- closer focusing (generally)
- takes film magazines
-
Francis,
This one has been answered before and is probably in the archives. In
case you can't find it, I'll give what I can. For the record, I was
in your shoes about 1 year ago. I was going to get MF and Pentax, but
was comparing the 645n to the 67II. I was fortunate that my local
shop
Mirror lock up.
The 645NII has mirror lock and mirror prefire as well.
Pål
On Mon, 24 Feb 2003, [iso-8859-1] Pål Jensen wrote:
Mirror lock up.
The 645NII has mirror lock and mirror prefire as well.
Oh, yeah.
Sorry, I'm limited to old tech by the wallet.
--
http://www.infotainment.org - more fun than a poke in your eye.
http://www.eighteenpercent.com-
tom,
Well, you can take the post I just made. I'll try to dig up some of
my old ones. One other thing to add is best uses. Weddings,
portraits, landscape, etc.
Bruce
Monday, February 24, 2003, 11:39:12 AM, you wrote:
-Original Message-
From: tom [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Mark,
That's really twisting his meaning. How many 645 owners out there go
out of their way to purchase a 67 lens specifically to use on their
645? I gotta believe it is low. The only time I've heard of anyone
doing that is if they have both cameras.
For this inquiry Francis is buying into
Begin Original Message
On Mon, 24 Feb 2003, Francis Alviar wrote:
I am considering investing in a medium format system.
I'd like to ask owners of the Pentax 645 and Pentax 67
cameras their opinion on which system to invest in and
why. Besides the difference in film size, what are
gfen,
My proofs come back as 4X5 from the lab. I would guess that has to do
with lab issues, not format issues.
Bruce
Monday, February 24, 2003, 11:53:52 AM, you wrote:
g On Mon, 24 Feb 2003, tom wrote:
Pro 67
- big neg
- built like a big old manual focus camera of yore
-
advise on medium format
tom,
Well, you can take the post I just made. I'll try to dig up some of
my old ones. One other thing to add is best uses. Weddings,
portraits, landscape, etc.
Bruce
Monday, February 24, 2003, 11:39:12 AM, you wrote:
-Original Message-
From: tom
On Mon, 24 Feb 2003, Bruce Dayton wrote:
My proofs come back as 4X5 from the lab. I would guess that has to do
with lab issues, not format issues.
67 or 645? I was referring to my 645 full frame prints, I believe you're
one of those 67 guys though, right? :)
I know that Bob Monohan's medium
.
Argh.
--
Thomas Van Veen Photography
www.thomasvanveen.com
301-758-3085
-Original Message-
From: Bruce Dayton [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, February 24, 2003 3:19 PM
To: gfen
Subject: Re: Seeking advise on medium format
gfen,
My proofs come back as 4X5 from the lab. I
On Mon, 24 Feb 2003, tom wrote:
It's growing quickly:
http://www.bigdayphoto.com/67VS645.html
Does the 67 have changable screens? I know the 645 does.
--
http://www.infotainment.org - more fun than a poke in your eye.
http://www.eighteenpercent.com- photography and
You could have mentioned interchangeable finders. The 67 has waist
level and rigid finders along with the prism, the 645 only has the
built in finder.
Also, the view through the finders is different. The 645 is
kepplerian - big image but must have eye centered correctly. That
bugged me.
On Mon, 24 Feb 2003, Bruce Dayton wrote:
Also, the view through the finders is different. The 645 is
kepplerian - big image but must have eye centered correctly. That
bugged me.
I've never noticed a problem, and my friend when he played with my 645 for
a day said that the 645 with large
Also, here's some notes culled from http://medfmt.8k.com/mf/go2.html:
Pentax 645/Pentax 645N AF.
Advantages:
Ability to operate most Ptx 67 lenses with full auto diaphragm operation.
(best 645)
Most consistently excellent lens series in 645 (IMO).(best 645)
Quietest shutter/mirror/motor in any
-Original Message-
From: Bruce Dayton [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
You could have mentioned interchangeable finders. The 67 has waist
level and rigid finders along with the prism, the 645 only has the
built in finder.
It's on the web page, which has been updated again.
Also, the
gfen,
I can say that I much prefer the aspect ratio of 67 over 35mm. Most
of the time 35mm feels just too long and narrow. Also knowing that I
am shooting pretty close to full frame for 8X10 has been nice.
The aspect ratio of 645 was another minor turnoff for me. Not big
enough to factor into
gfen,
You bet it does. On the 67ii they are very easy to change, because
there is no finder in the way. Just pop the finder off and then take
the screen out. Put the new one in and put the finder back on top.
Bruce
Monday, February 24, 2003, 12:32:50 PM, you wrote:
g On Mon, 24 Feb 2003,
gfen,
Pretty good list. I would say however, that it is dated. Based on
what I read, the Mamiya 645D, Contaxt 645 and Hasselblad 645 are
pressing very hard on the Pentax and in many circles are considered
superior.
The 67 data is for the old 67 not the 67ii. There are some
refinements that
If you buy a used body and half a dozen used lenses,
67 works out cheaper as a system than 645.
JCO
-Original Message-
From: tom [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, February 24, 2003 3:36 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: Seeking advise on medium format
It's growing
tom,
Exactly. That is why I can't emphasize enough, that one should try
both systems before buying. They are both excellent and in my
opinion, different enough to address different types of users.
Bruce
Monday, February 24, 2003, 1:00:53 PM, you wrote:
-Original Message-
From:
Not if you scan and print digitally.
JCO
-Original Message-
From: tom [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, February 24, 2003 3:40 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: Seeking advise on medium format
Yeah, mine are 4x5's too. I don't really think this is a big issue
, 2003 3:33 PM
To: gfen
Subject: Re: Seeking advise on medium format
You could have mentioned interchangeable finders. The 67 has waist
level and rigid finders along with the prism, the 645 only has the
built in finder.
Also, the view through the finders is different. The 645
Bruce Dayton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
That's really twisting his meaning. How many 645 owners out there go
out of their way to purchase a 67 lens specifically to use on their
645? I gotta believe it is low. The only time I've heard of anyone
doing that is if they have both cameras.
Actually,
do you still get the auto aperture function
when you mount a 67 lens on a 645 body
via the adapter?
JCO
-Original Message-
From: Mark Roberts [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, February 24, 2003 4:51 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Seeking advise on medium format
PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: Seeking advise on medium format
Not if you scan and print digitally.
JCO
-Original Message-
From: tom [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, February 24, 2003 3:40 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: Seeking advise on medium format
Yeah, mine are 4x5
-Original Message-
From: Mark Roberts [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bruce Dayton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
That's really twisting his meaning. How many 645 owners
out there go
out of their way to purchase a 67 lens specifically to use on their
645? I gotta believe it is low. The
J. C. O'Connell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
do you still get the auto aperture function
when you mount a 67 lens on a 645 body
via the adapter?
Yep. (So I'm told.)
--
Mark Roberts
Photography and writing
www.robertstech.com
Mark wrote:
Actually, I'm considering doing just that myself. I'm thinking of the 67
165mm f2.8 for my 645. (I've heard people say they don't like the 645
150/2.8, which is the closest 645 lens)
Why? I've heard that the 165/2.8 is not the best among the Pentax 67 lenses whereas
the 150/2.8
Bruce wrote:
If you like the old style of cameras and handling then you
might like the 67, if you like all the automation of the new cameras
then you will probably like the 645.
(snip)
I tend to shoot more manually or aperture priority, liked
better the style and handling of the 67ii and
Kepplerian finder must be dead centered on your eye and is hard to use
when wearing glasses.
Thats the old one. It was modified on the 645N and NII
Pål
-Original Message-
From: Pål Jensen [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Mark wrote:
Actually, I'm considering doing just that myself. I'm
thinking of the 67
165mm f2.8 for my 645. (I've heard people say they don't
like the 645
150/2.8, which is the closest 645 lens)
Why? I've heard
Mark,
Are there any other lenses in 67 that are not available in 645 or that
are real dogs in 645?
I have both 165's and have debated with myself many times as to
whether to sell the 2.8 because of the need of the leaf shutter. But
that extra stop is always handy to have and the lens does have
: Seeking advise on medium format
-Original Message-
From: Pål Jensen [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Mark wrote:
Actually, I'm considering doing just that myself. I'm
thinking of the 67
165mm f2.8 for my 645. (I've heard people say they don't
like the 645
150/2.8, which
Pål,
Well I tried to 645n's and it was no different. Perhaps the 645nii or
maybe later modified 645n's but the brand new ones in the shop I
bought from had that issue.
Bruce
Monday, February 24, 2003, 2:21:02 PM, you wrote:
Kepplerian finder must be dead centered on your eye and is hard
Pål,
That's like saying that any two cameras operate about the same. It is
most like comparing the LX to the ZX-5n (build quality aside). The LX
is manual focus, has different finders has a different feel, lenses of
that era feel different, etc. Looking through the finders is
different, aspect
Another thing to consider is the price of pictures. 645 gives 15 exposures
per roll of 120, while the 6x7 gives only 10. It may or may not matter to
you, but it is a factor that shouldn't be overlooked.
Pat White
49 matches
Mail list logo
